An exhaustive and authoritative investigation into the Christadelphians with links from their own sources as well as insights from former members. Complete examination of their history, organisation, theology, practices, and the challenges they face.

Message For Christadelphians

I would like to welcome you to my site and invite you to consider the information,
insights and experience presented. It may be a valuable resource
for you. In many ways it is tailored to your perspective. That is because
as a former Christadelphian I am coming from where you are. This site has
now been widely read by Christadelphians, who form a high percentage of its readership
based upon the feedback I receive. Many have written and expressed thanks for the
value it provides. Several have also visited many times based on the site
statistics. Some agree, some disagree, some agree with parts. That’s
okay. Hopefully we all grow in understanding and that’s really what this site
is about. Exploring the issues - and in that sense it is personal. Although
I seek to be fair and objective, to some degree it is related to my experiences,
what I have read and the people and thinking I have been exposed to. As I
grow in understanding and as I receive feedback and criticism, I try and alter it
to improve its balance, correct weaknesses and more fully explore issues.
I believe by doing this it aids those who are Christadelphians by helping them better
understand their own religion, explore doubts and concerns, and move further down
the pathway of truth we all want to follow.

Although to some Christadelphians the wide considerations of issues found on this
site may be portrayed as opposing truth, in fact it is very much in tune with what the
founder of the community advocated, at least initially. The idea promoted
was that light reveals darkness, truth overcomes error and can withstand strong
investigation. In fact truth has nothing to fear from a rigorous examination
of facts and evidence. Institutionalisation was portrayed as the obstacle
to free thought by contrast. Although there is a widely supported status quo,
there are also signs many Christadelphians want more scope to question both their theology
as well as traditions which are limiting to that.

There is another reason. The community is no longer a movement based on reforming
existing theology. Like many established denominations it has lost energy
and seems increasingly archaic. Its historical focuses no longer serve it
well and its structures provide little support for contemporary challenges.
Not reforming it is no longer an option and the prospects without that are a lingering
death. In addition after 150 years, the weaknesses of the historical approaches
are evident. It isn’t going to return there. Nor will reform occur simply
because folk read the Bible and religious books more. Deeper questions about
some of the foundational assumptions are at the heart of this and they are not going
to go away. The evidence is that in its traditional areas it is in severe
decline and not all of that is due to the wickedness of the world. These challenges
are considered further in “Wrestling
with the Need for Change.”

Personally I doubt the community will survive as it is, although it may emerge in
new strains. It isn’t the same as it was in 1880 or 1900 anyway. Ultimately
what matters isn’t the survival of a religious denomination, but that as individuals,
families and communities we have ways forward. The truth is the community
never came out of a void or had a restoration of the first century gospel.
It was a product of its times and to a degree questioned certain assumptions, but
not others. We have had 150 years to explore the assumptions which haven’t
been questioned, find out about verses we can’t easily reconcile with our own theological
positions and learn the limits of certain approaches. Even statements of faith
and constitutions and determined members trying to maintain what they see as gospel
truth can’t totally subdue weaknesses we begin to grasp within ourselves.
That approach no longer works as well, there isn’t a central hierarchy to maintain
it and so at some point we have to genuinely seek to understand the issues that
people raise and want answers to. Force cannot ever supplant real answers
to questions raised and where this site is inaccurate then its weaknesses will emerge
and be answered. On the other hand where it has validity eventually those
issues will need to be addressed, no matter how great denial may be right now.

The advantage I have as a former Christadelphian is a greater ability to raise issues
and questions without needing to consider how that will affect my social status
or fellowship position. The downside of course has been that I have had to
live with a loss of social support, a very real struggle to move forward and this
raises some other relevant issues. Whatever failures the community has it
does supply many benefits to its adherents. A community is one of them.
The reality is that the pursuit of truth and understanding does have a price tag
attached to it. Those who wish to question things openly need to be aware
of this price tag and for many it is a price they may not wish to pay. They
may also believe they are better remaining where they are and trying to alter perceptions
from within. These are the choices I cannot make for anyone else.

Join me in my consideration of where we have come from, what it teaches us, what
knowledge and experience we can present to the far wider group of folk outside the
community and the deep questions of life, spirituality and purpose. This is
a resource base that has been built for you. Take from it what you find of
value in your journey and blessings to you.

Some Objections

Isn't This Site Negative?

An objection I have received from a few Christadelphians is that this site
is negative and doesn’t help remaining members. To put that in perspective
most feedback I have received has been positive, complementary and supportive and
much has come from existing Christadelphians. The reason for this is that
not all the information presents perspectives that they agree with. Instead
of answering the points raised on this site it is suggested that my whole life must
therefore be completely negative.

Basic research shows that the whole community was established on the basis that
all other forms of Christianity were in error and much Christadelphian time and
energy has been spent seeking to prove that. The idea that this could be negative
for other Christians or disturbing their inner tranquillity has never been given
any weight. Instead the whole thrust has been that the important aspect is
Truth. It seems incongruous therefore that the same criteria should not be
applied to the Christadelphian community and its theology and how it works in practice
examined.

Those who are commended to “search out the Truth” should therefore have the opportunity
and means to examine varying perspectives.

We Aren't Perfect

Another objection is that “we aren’t perfect” and I am in essence expecting people
to be perfect. I most certainly recognise that fact and I’m not expecting
this to be the case. I recognise that there are strengths as well as weaknesses
within the community and they are mentioned on this site. Perhaps it isn’t
perfectly objective and balanced, that’s because it is based on my research and
my perspectives. The real issues are that there are some deep-seated and structural
weaknesses of position that need examination. I have a concern if maintaining
internal tranquillity and an internal unwillingness to not question (by what is
a closed community) is at the expense of those who
leave or who are
disfellowshipped. I also believe the community has some need to
answer the valid concerns raised by this website that (in private) are acknowledged
by many existing members.

Why Don't You Just Move On?

The suggestion here is that as a former Christadelphian I have an axe to grind and
I should simply remove myself from view.

Unfortunately what this ignores is that to some extent we are all a product of our
backgrounds and conditioning. Most Christadelphians today have been born into
the faith and are brought up in a community which teaches principles that isolate
them from others of differing perspective. To leave the community therefore
requires a person to totally re-evaluate all their positions, attitudes and thoughts.
This has to be done within an environment where questioning can lead to disfellowship.
It is therefore a very difficult process, because leaving can lead to the loss of
emotional support and isolation. The community equips people to live within
the community, but does not equip them to be able to live outside of it easily.
In that respect it does have some
cult-like aspects to it.

As part of that process those who leave do have to understand the community, where
they have come from and why they think as they do. As a very exclusive community
with very exclusive “we alone have the Truth” attitudes it doesn’t have any mechanism
to relate to those who question anything. It therefore doesn’t understand
the process of anyone who questions anything. This site forms a necessary
part of my personal moving forward and it also helps others who do the same.

You Will Be Judged By God

The suggestion here is that for questioning and raising issues God will decide I
am unworthy and I will be condemned by Him. I am glad when I receive emails
like this that at the judgement it is not them who will be judging me. I would also suggest that if God has given us reason and emotions and the ability to think we were meant to use them. The concept that others may just reach different conclusions
and explanations and they may in some cases actually have better explanations and
reasoning seems to escape some sincere believers. We should also realise
that to establish a system of church authority, to disfellowship and a take a position
that requires divine
validity is also one that potentially could lead to a judgement by God itself.
What if a person has been rejected whom God accepts? How would he view that?
What if the position of authority we adopted turned out to be wrong theology on
our part? How would “we thought we were doing what you wanted” or “we thought
we had to protect the Truth” sound then?

I am not seeking to destroy “the Truth”. I value truth. I am sincerely questioning whether
it adds up and I am more than willing to alter if I need to. I do not hate
Christadelphians and I am not on a mission to hurt them. I simply believe
that a full a discussion of issues is suppressed because of the nature of being
a closed community, I believe many who leave struggle and I believe many examining
the community need to have a full picture of how things work.

The general feedback I receive has found this site helpful and have been supportive
and thankful.